It's Time for George Burke to Go

By: Lowell
Published On: 12/7/2007 5:08:48 PM

The following is a letter sent today to Sen.-elect (and DPVA vice chair for outreach) Donald McEachin.  On the "flip," you can read Sen.-elect McEachin's reply.

Dear Senator-Elect McEachin,

Congratulations once again on your election to the Virginia State Senate. We are particularly impressed that you were the only incoming Senator to receive over 80% of the vote in this last election. Obviously, your constituents feel the same way as we do about your outstanding record of service to this Commonwealth, as well as your strength in fighting for what's right and against injustice.

Multiple times in your career you have had to stand up to forces within the Democratic Party to ensure that we've remained grounded in our principles. This year, you risked your seat in the General Assembly and perhaps your political career to take on a primary battle with the only Democratic member of the General Assembly to support George Allen over Jim Webb. We are eternally grateful that you did this, and that you defeated "Benedict" Lambert.

Now we are writing you as Vice Chairman of the Democratic Party of Virginia to once again seek your help in cleaning up our party.

Please see the "flip" for more...

On the Democratic Party of Virginia Steering Committee and the State Central Committee sits the 11th Congressional District Chair, George Burke. During the Webb-Miller primary, an individual using the pseudonym of "Thomas Paine" and "Thomas Paine Patriot" terrorized the progressive blogosphere in 2006 with taunts at Jim Webb, at Webb supporters, local Democratic Party members and officers and at Democratic bloggers. Many of these posts were done using an a specific IP address (an unique address that identifies a specific internet connection). After the primary, someone purporting to be "George Burke" posted comments on Not Larry Sabato blog. When 11th CD Chair George Burke was confronted with this, he did not admit or deny that he had made these comments, retract them, disavow them, or apologize for his conduct notwithstanding having been given numerous opportunities to do so. He has been silent and has refused to say anything. The only assumption we can take from this is that these were his comments or that he agrees with them. Sadly, this disgraceful behavior continues to this day and continues to embarrass our party.

The Party Plan states the following:

Section 2.1 Membership
Every resident of the Commonwealth of Virginia who believes in the principles of the Democratic Party is hereby declared to be a member of the Democratic Party of Virginia.

Section 2.2 Participation
Every person who participates as a candidate or voter in a Democratic primary, convention or caucus must be qualified to vote in the next ensuing general election or special election. No person shall participate in a Democratic primary, convention or caucus who intends to support a candidate opposed to any Democratic nominee in that general or special election.

We are asking that you initiate George Burke's removal from the Central Committee on the following grounds:

1) While 11th District Chair, the following comments about now United States Senator Jim Webb on leading Virginia progressive blogs under screen names "Thomas Paine" and "Thomas Paine Patriot" and later one of these IP addresses was used by "George Burke." Some of these comments included:

a)"One Webb mailing is like a one single piece of fly shit in a pile of horse manure."

b)"That is why Webb left the job of Reagan's Navy Secretary, he didn't want to give the men and women of the military a pay raise. Helping the big defense contractors build more ships was more important to him."

c)"But like most bullies, Jim Webb shrinks from the actual fight and hides behind the coattails of his band of bullies."

d)"Too many of the Webb supporters on and off the blogs.. I say good riddance to you. We don't need your kind in the Democratic Party. Go back to the Republicans who have made an artform out of internal bickering."

Needless to say, this is completely unacceptable behavior -- or at least it should be completely unacceptable behavior -- from a member of the DPVA Leadership.

2) While 11th District Chair, the following comments were made about Lowell Feld, founder of Raising Kaine, Virginia's leading progressive community blog under screen names "Thomas Paine" and "Thomas Paine Patriot" and later one of these IP addresses was used by "George Burke."

a)"Feld deserves to be held accountable for the damage he is reaping on the Democratic Party. Unfortunately, too many people are afraid to confront him because he will aim his Webb attack dogs at those who do take umbrage with his rants."

b)"Once people realize that Commissar Feld (and some others) censor their blogs to eliminate opposing views, Pravda (formerly RK) loses any impact it might have had. It is just a "house organ" for Webb and, unfortunately for Lowell, he is going to have to suck on that "organ" when Webb loses."

c)"Commissar Feld deserves to be punished for his totalitarian actions. He is not a Democrat. He is not a Marxist. He is not even a Communist. He is a Stalinist!"

d)"Lowell, like Goebbels, wants to be the master of misinformation about Webb and a CENSOR of free speech."

The final two comments may be the most disturbing of all. As you know, Joseph Stalin was a well-known anti-semite who summarily persecuted and executed Jews, and used Pravda as a means to further anti-semitic propaganda throughout Russia. Joseph Goebbels was Minister for Public Enlightenment and Propaganda during the horrific Nazi regime from 1933 to 1945. Comparing Lowell, who is Jewish, not once, but TWICE to a monsters like Stalin and Goebbels should have no place in the Democratic Party, let alone its leadership. For this comment alone, George Burke deserves at the bare minimum to be severely reprimanded.

3) While 11th District Chair, the following comments were made about Ben Tribbett, founder of the Not Larry Sabato blog, under screen names "Thomas Paine" and "Thomas Paine Patriot" and later one of these IP addresses was used by "George Burke."

"Ben, Are you out of your mind? I thought the Burke quotes were biased in favor of Webb, not Miller.

Anyway, I can only figure you have a grudge against Burke because you were kicked off the 11th District Committee and the new committee members also dumped former Chair Emilie Miller."

This quote is particularly disturbing because it claims Mr. Tribbett was "kicked off" the 11th District Committee which Burke chairs. In fact, Mr. Tribbett did not seek re-election to the 11th District Committee in May of 2005 and his term ended at the convention where new members were elected. Mr. Burke intentionally misrepresented the results of his own convention, and has potentially left the Democratic Party of Virginia open to legal action against it if Mr. Tribbett feels his reputation was injured by this lie (or by the implication that he is "out of [his] mind").

4) Recently, Mr. Burke has once again resurfaced on the blogs, this time brazenly under the screen name "11thCD". This seems to mock his official role in the Democratic Party of Virginia as 11th District Chair, but it's no joke -- it's really George Burke posting as a high-ranking Democratic Party official. As such, Burke's comments can be seen as official statements from the party.

Recently, Mr. Burke made the following statement about party reorganizations in Fairfax County's Springfield magisterial district:

It was about Kenton and Mark Itkoff's daughter voting in the caucus to elect the Springfield chair and there were two candidates in the race.

There was apparently a contested election for chair and both Kenton and Mark Itkoff's daughter were not registered voters. Whether someone is 15, 17, or 60 years old, they cannot participate in local city/county, CD, or DPVA state caucuses if they are not registered to vote.

As you know, caucuses are held in Fairfax County to elect committee members, and then the committee members elect their officers. There are multiple positions on the DPVA Steering Committee and Central Committee that Mr. Burke sits on that are specifically designated for teenage Democrats. Mr. Burke either doesn't understand that teenagers can be elected by the registered voters in a party caucus to Democratic Committees (and then vote on officers), or he intentionally is misleading the public to discourage young people from participating. Either way, this should be unacceptable behavior from a party official who if anything should be encouraging young people to participate in the Party as much as possible.

Finally, in his new screen name of "11thCD", Mr. Burke once again put the party in legal jeopardy with these comments:

"For Ben: Why did you allow the Republicans to put out a district-wide mailer in 2005 that listed "10 Reasons Why This Democrat is Voting Republican for Michael Golden by Ben Tribbett, Democratic Candidate for Delegate, Campaign Manager for Chap Petersen, Democratic Activist, and Robinson HS graduate." As we know, it resulted in Ben getting kicked out of the Democratic Party on November 10, 2005."

Once again, Mr. Burke either does not know his facts or is using his position to misrepresent and slander. Mr. Tribbett was last a member of the Fairfax County Democratic Committee in 2004 when he paid his membership dues for one year. To be a member of the County Committee, dues must be paid or a form must be filled out indicating an inability to pay- neither of which Mr. Tribbett did in 2005. In addition a hearing must be held with 10 days notice to kick a committee member out. Since none of these things occurred, and since Mr. Tribbett was not a member of the FCDC, he obviously could not be "kicked out". Once again, Mr. Burke is using his position to mislead the public about party actions. Furthermore, he is putting the party in serious legal jeopardy if someone believes they have been injured by these statements and takes it to court.

Senator-Elect McEachin, we are requesting your help in purging the party of this embarrassment. Party leaders can criticize our elected officials, but these comments which George Burke again has never disavowed crossed the line into actively opposing our nominee - as the Chair of a Congressional District Committee. Our party is one of inclusion and tolerance. This cannot be tolerated in the Democratic Party no matter to whom it is directed. We would be happy to provide you with evidence, such as links to George Burke's comments and IP addresses.

Thanks for your consideration and assistance in this matter.

Sincerely,

Lowell Feld
Founder of Raising Kaine  
                                                Ben Tribbett
Founder of Not Larry Sabato

Donald McEachin's reply.

December 7, 2007

Dear Lowell and Ben ,

Thank you for your email this afternoon. I very much appreciate being kept apprised of this situation and your concerns. Both of you have worked hard to forward Democratic values and to get Democrats elected and for that, I am truly grateful. I know that, as elected officials and candidates, we appreciate the forum we are given on both your blogs. As you well know, I have been happy to participate in live blogs and in blog talk radio.

Certainly the information and the quotes you have sent me are troubling. I understand both your dismay and concern. However, I am not the appropriate party to address this issue. I don't live in the district or even in the regional area of Northern Virginia. However, because I consider both of you friends and take your concerns very seriously, I am going to forward your letter to Democratic Party Chairman Dick Cranwell and ask that he take a serious look at the situation.

When the new General Assembly Session begins, I will be in Office 318 in the General Assembly Building in my new position as State Senator. You both played a role in helping me achieve this and I certainly hope you know my door is open and I look forward to having you visit me during Session.

Thank you again for all you do for Democrats. Keep up the good work and Virginia will continue to change from purple to blue!

Sincerely,

A. Donald McEachin


Comments



Awesome work, Guys! (The Grey Havens - 12/7/2007 5:55:01 PM)
George Burke terrorized this community during the 2006 primary with his convoluted attacks, lies and smears unbecomming a Democrat.

Congrats to you, Lowell and Ben for fighting the good fight, and Thank you Senator (elect) McEachin for doing the right thing.

We can only hope that Chairman Cranwell will take swift and decisive action.



Could This Post Explain Why George & Connolly Don't Like Blogs? (Lee Diamond - 12/7/2007 6:03:33 PM)
It is worth noting that most organizations have these problems.  I am currently witnessing similar problems in another organization, although I do not think that situation is driven by power issues.

I do not always agree with Lowell, but I do think that he is  entitled to respect and appreciation for his contributions.  Of course, we worked closely together on the Webb campaign.  Ben Tribbett is possibly even more of a challenge for the Democratic Party, but his work has also helped the Democrats.  These guys are kind of akin to watchdogs (when they aren't activists).  The Connolly's and George's of the world don't like to be watched.

I think that Amy Reger should get the different people in Fairfax together and try to get FCDC on track to being a reasonably transparent, professionally run organization.  That means being a lot more open and inclusive.  It means taking a genuine interest in bringing new blood into the organization.  In order to do that, the opaque ways of doing business have to change.  People have to perform their duties or be replaced.

People should want to join FCDC because it has an inviting atmosphere.  Then, there will be a lot less energy put into so many outside organizations that are trying their best to do the things that FCDC has not been doing.

The bottom line is that FCDC is messed up and energy is being wasted as a result.  I don't know about the 11thcd committee per se, but George is a huge player in NOVA.  He abused his position this year as well in the 8thcd.

We can meet with George etc if they want to do that.  The contributions of grassroots activists (often alienated from FCDC) over the last several years have been huge.  It would be cost effective for DPVA to hire a mediator in an effort to resolve some of the disputes.

There is a very real opportunity for us to put VA in play next year.



Thank You Lee (AnonymousIsAWoman - 12/7/2007 6:28:19 PM)
Lee, this is the most insightful comment I've seen and a model of diplomacy.  I completely support your suggestion that it would be cost effective for the DPVA to hire a mediator, or a specialist in conflict resolution, to resolved this dispute.

And Amy Reger or somebody at the state level does need to help make the FCDC a more welcoming place for newcomers.  

At this point in time, the Democratic Party has to grow if it is to continue to win elections in Virginia.  If we keep fighting each other this way, we will lose important races. Just as important, we will lose talented people who bring unique talents to politics.  That is true on both sides.

Then Virginia loses.  When Democrats are in office, there are more programs and policies that benefit ordinary people.  When Republicans hold office, they want to fight culture wars and cut taxes for the very wealthy. They ignore health care reform, education and transportation needs. They support big business over working people. They will endanger women's reproductive freedom and basic human rights.

Need I go on?

We need to resolve the fights going on.  Not because they are without merit.  Real people have had real feelings badly hurt.  They have been slandered.  And that's also true on both sides at this point.

We need somebody who can heal this rather than add fuel to this fire.  And your suggestions go a long way toward dampening the flames.



A Major Heads Up to the DPVA or Else We Lose (Dianne - 12/8/2007 11:44:12 AM)
Lee,  You've written the best comment to this diary.  You are addressing the bigger picture, which is the ability of the DPVA and the Steering and Central Committess to manage the individual local and district committees so that issues are addressed at the proper level and get resolved.  You said:  
I think that Amy Reger should get the different people in Fairfax together and try to get FCDC on track to being a reasonably transparent, professionally run organization.  That means being a lot more open and inclusive.  It means taking a genuine interest in bringing new blood into the organization.  In order to do that, the opaque ways of doing business have to change.  People have to perform their duties or be replaced.
Well this should apply to every committee.  I live in the 1st CD and receive literally nothing from the Chair and we are having an election in just 4 days and a Democrat is running for Congress!!!

Everyone knows my gripe with my local committee:  rigged reorgs; no committee fundraisers or serious outreach; bylaws that had to be as the Chair and Vice Chair wanted them (not as the members wanted); a disengaged and do-nothing leadership; and only a handful of volunteers to do all the work.  (I think the average age of my local committee's members is about 65+).  

If we are going to win a majority in this state then for sure the DPVA has got to get a light under their bums, ensure that committees are run correctly and effectively and start communicating with the Democrats in the state.  I just finished watching "As the Nation Goes" on IFC and the lessons are all there.  

A DPVA Chairman that rarely communicates with Virginia Democrats is ludicrous.  An Executive Director who almost never communicates is irresponsible, reckless and negligent. And a Communications Director who never communicates is grotesque and outlandish. If the "elites/insiders" just continue to talk only to the "elites/insiders" you can kiss the idea of Virginia becoming blue goodbye.

Reach out, talk about the Democratic Party and what it will do for Americans, talk about the Republican Party and what it will take away from Americans.  Just do it!  Speak to us DPVA!!!!



Webb attack dog (Matt H - 12/7/2007 6:19:33 PM)
I take that as a compliment - count me in the pack!  I didn't realize the extent of Burke's rogue behavior.


Oh, there's a LOT more (Lowell - 12/7/2007 6:22:10 PM)
Go to the RK search engine (on the left), select "comments" and type in Thomas Paine.  Then, enjoy...well, actually you won't enjoy it because it's sickening and evil, but whatever.


Then click "Comments By" (Lowell - 12/7/2007 6:25:54 PM)
n/t


Here are a few (Lowell - 12/7/2007 6:31:02 PM)
Todd and his wild-eyed cronies for Webb are taking their cues from the strategy the Swift Boaters used to scuttle John Kerry, attack Tim Kaine, and defeat Max Cleland.

Speaking of Georgia senators, how do we know if newly-minted Democrat (and long-time Republican and Reaganite) James Webb won't turn out to be another Zell Miller?  How do we know he won't align himself with the GOP and join Virgil Goode as a turncoat.  After all, Webb has already abandoned one party.  Who is to say he won't abandon the Democrats, if he is elected.

and

Phriendlyjaime, Don't get you panties all twisted over my posts.  Maybe you should spend a little of that bar money you are giving to Webb to medicate youself with your favorite libation.

Your venomous language is not appropriate for a young lady, particularly one who is representing a candidate for the US Senate.

and

Some Democrats are raising grave concerns about Leslie Byrne taking such an active role in Webb's campaign, particularly in light of the fact that Webb spoke on behalf of Republican legislative candidates in Maryland just before the 2002 election.

Webb appeared at a rally in Annapolis hours before the 2002 election to endorse the candidacies of GOP Maryland House of Delegate candidates Nancy Almgren, Michael Collins and Herb McMillan and Maryland Senate candidate Andy Smarick.

These Republican endorsements by Webb came two years after he endorsed George Allen and George Bush in the 2000 elections.  Webb's Republican endorsements came at a time when Webb had allegedly switched allegiance from the Republican Party to the Democrats.

What's the story here... and does Leslie know this?

It's not like Leslie to be uninformed.  I can only surmise that she was misinformed.



Lets Focus On The Problem & Not Personalities (Lee Diamond - 12/7/2007 6:34:03 PM)
We all (most people anyway) tend to focus on the personalities involved in a conflict, but I think that we should start turning our attention to the problem and how we fix the Party infrastructure.  Leadership is certainly a big part of it.  Some people have thrown around the idea that FCDC should hire an Exec Dir.  That would be a great opportunity for a young operative coming off a series of successful campaigns.

Probably, many reforms are needed.

I want to turn the situation into something positive.  Whatever George has done, I do not think that more conflict will be beneficial.



This is a great comment from NLS (Lowell - 12/7/2007 6:36:18 PM)

Unfortunately, George Burke's misdeeds do not stop there. He has used his contacts with labor to manipulate union members in an effort to undermine people in the party that he seems to want to compete with.

The thought that Burke would manipulate and use such a key constituency of the Democratic party is deeply troubling. The Party owes labor tremedously for all the help it has delivered over the years, and continues to deliver.

Labor does not deserve to be treated as George Burke's pawns in his quest to dominate the party structure and tear down anyone in his path.

There is a real concern in FCDC that if Burke is not, at the very least, severely reprimanded he will cause lasting damage to our relationship with organized labor.

But in the end, the most important reason for Burke to be ousted from his DPVA leadership position is because he views his position and its associated power, not as tool for electing Democrats, but as an end in itself. He has a quest for power that must be checked if the Party is going to get past internal bickering and on with the business of electing Democrats.

That's what is at stake here.



It's time for a change (Eric - 12/7/2007 6:36:02 PM)
While a good number of people would cheer if that change was the ouster of George Burke, I'm thinking it's time for a change at a higher level.  

There has always been a battle between independent and semi-independent activists and party professionals.  With the  internet and blogging being merged into the picture the balance of power, the ability to act, to motivate, and to influence have all changed drastically.  In a few short years the entire political process is no longer tethered to the party establishment - there are other voices and leaders who do play an important role in the process.

I'll stop there - no need to turn this into a netroots lovefest.

But given the advances the independents have made, and the fact that they're here to stay (as well as the tools that have empowered them), it is time for the party to recognize this shift.  It is time to accept and incorporate the independents into the varsity team.  It is time for the party to allow change to happen.

In some cases that change will require a change in leadership.  Not necessarily because leaders have differences of opinion or wish to remain true to their current philosophies, but because some leaders will resist the change itself.  Those that stand in the way of change must be moved aside.  

As for George Burke, I'll be the last one to condone his behavior - at least what he's been accused of and never denied.  While he certainly deserves to lose his chairmanship over such poor leadership and detrimental activity, I'd be willing to look beyond all of that if he steps up to be a champion of this true change within the party.  It's about moving forward and this sea change within the party is just what is needed.  And, IMO, if that happens old rivalries can be put aside in favor of progress.



Eyes on the prize (TheGreenMiles - 12/7/2007 6:48:00 PM)
I'm glad Lowell and Ben are taking strong action on this.  Our cause is far more important than any of us, our bruised egos, or our petty grievances.  If George Burke can't see that, he shouldn't be in a position of power.


I'd love to see what Fairfax Dems think about this... (Rob - 12/7/2007 6:54:09 PM)
People like Chap and Leslie Byrne...


Please keep 'em out of it (AnonymousIsAWoman - 12/8/2007 1:03:24 PM)
The last thing a candidate running for office or one newly elected needs is to be drawn into an internecine fight like this.

And it's the last thing the party needs right now.  Hopefully, people like Lee Diamond and Used2BeNeutral can help make some peace here.  



No justice, no peace. (Lowell - 12/8/2007 1:11:34 PM)
n/t


That's Our New Slogan (Ben - 12/8/2007 2:33:12 PM)
n/t


What I Know (Lee Diamond - 12/7/2007 7:04:48 PM)
I know that there is a problem in FCDC and apparently in the 11thcd committee.  I don't know what "higher level" in a previous post refers to.  Tim Kaine has worked hard to strengthen the Party.  Clearly, we have a strong feeling of dissatisfaction wih some of the key allies he has to work with at the local level.  Some of those (unelected and County officials - Not state legislators) allies seem to represent their own interests or the interests of a small group of insiders.  Interestingly, that narrow approach has not helped the Democratic Party.  That narrow approach would have left the United States Senate in Republican hands.


Burke denied it (Chris Guy - 12/7/2007 9:18:21 PM)
When I emailed Mr. Burke and confronted him about it myself, he denied it. Check it out here


IP's don't lie, dude (DanG - 12/8/2007 12:51:43 AM)
That's all I'm gonna say.


COMMENT HIDDEN (Used2Bneutral - 12/8/2007 7:46:38 AM)


Oh I almost forgot..... there is another situation that applys too (Used2Bneutral - 12/8/2007 8:56:15 AM)
IP addresses from public or group situations also can be confusing. For example, all twenty or thirty PCs including Macs and even some wireless devices that can send WiFi messages that occupy and share a link to the internet many times share the same IP address.... college dorms, Student Union Buildings, public facilities like the Cable access station. All users from that location may show as operating on the same "Public" IP address depending on how it is configured.... in the case of the Fairfax cable access station it is on Cox and for security reason the public IP address is dynamically assigned within the pool of address that are allocated to the station and then a further random assignment occurs from each of the WiFi routers.  We did the same at the Anderson Road joint campaign facility in McLean for this entire past election cycle from that building....

So the IP address alone can be misleading if you don't understand exactly what you are looking at.



Tom can ease George's Paine. (jsrutstein - 12/8/2007 9:02:22 AM)
One would think that two separate people so ideologically alike would want to help each other, especially if it were easy to do so.  If Burke won't categorically deny that he was pretending to be Tom Paine, and he can't prove that he wasn't, why won't the real Tom Paine step forward to help his slandering soulmate?


It's time to stop the excuses (Lowell - 12/8/2007 9:19:37 AM)
George needs to publicly own up to what he did.  Lame excuses about "rotating IP addresses" and other bullshit just make things a lot worse.  


From the technical perspective (Eric - 12/8/2007 9:55:51 AM)
I agree with your statement 100%.  IP addresses can and do rotate - making it difficult at times to confirm the identity of an individual.

However, two factors make it very likely these comments came from George.  

1. The odds are astronomical that a single rotating IP address would be responsible for numerous Thomas Paine comments AND for real George Burke comments AND no comments from other users.  It's possible under a few scenarios, but very unlikely.  

2. Some of the wording and phrases are the same or very similar.  Each of us has a way of writing that is fairly unique and if enough is written patterns will emerge.   So it's also unlikely that two individuals, TP and GB, have the same writing style.  Again, it's possible, but unlikely.

So for the TP comments to not be George's, two unlikely scenarios would have to play out simultaneously.  I just don't see that happening in the real world.



And as I said before I agree with your logic as well (Used2Bneutral - 12/8/2007 10:31:07 AM)
As I said earlier, George has agreed to a very public level playing field to address and comfront these issues and HOPEFULLY get them all behind us.... Eric, with you and I and the rest of the Inside Scoop team it will be a fair forum... if nothing else it should be entaining TV... I want the "Screen Rights!!!" before Eric Byler grabs them :)


This isn't a joke. (Lowell - 12/8/2007 10:34:51 AM)
And it's certainly not for entertainment purposes.  Jim, I like you and believe you mean well, but please stop distracting from what we wrote in our letter.


I don't consider this a joke (Used2Bneutral - 12/8/2007 11:05:09 AM)
This needs to be fixed.... and lobbing grenades over the wall using the blog doesn't seem to be getting this fixed.... I am dead serious in my intentions, you and the others involved in this have done way too much for way too many people and the party to not get this behind us.... I don't expect anybody is going to kiss and make up, but I have heard both sides constatnly punching at shadows and going now where except to lobbing a-bombs at each other now....

I, like a lot of people here, want to see this come to a conclusion and back to team work as much as that is possible....

This is not a joke, but I was trying insert a little humor to defuse some anger only..... its a fault of mine



This is NOT an even-handed situation (Lowell - 12/8/2007 12:35:32 PM)
This is like when the media says, "on the one hand, 99.9999% of scientists believe in global warming; on the other hand, there's one guy with a tin foil hat who doesn't -- let's give him equal time with the 99.9999% of the scientists!"   It's extremely annoying in cases, like this one, where there is absolutely NO moral equivalency.  


EXACTLY (Ben - 12/8/2007 2:35:30 PM)
Jim, I'm very disappointed in you.


Ben and Lowell, let me get this straight.... (Used2Bneutral - 12/9/2007 12:42:12 AM)
You want George to come on here and discuss the issues in a fair and non-emotional way with 200 bloggers on one side and him and maybe a rag tag group of supporters who will attempt to defend against a completely stacked deck... Yet a public forum with neutral parties from both sides of this conflict supervising as they have demonstrated their ability to do numerous other times is not an acceptable alternative???

No matter what the actual content may actually be, you want to be the accuser, prosecutor, judge, jury and executioner even though there may just be another side to the story.... and this is the only playground where you will consider discussing it???

No Ben, I'm the one and a few others who have stated such that are disappointed... even if I may agree with most all of your points, George deserves the right to explain himself in a non-anonymous forum just like you guys. He has earned that much as he worked hard for DOZENS of years for all sorts of candidates and Democrats and just because you say, he should be tossed aside ????



Did he or didn't he? (jsrutstein - 12/9/2007 7:12:33 AM)
There's enough circumstantial evidence to show that it's more likely than not that Burke posted comments pretending to be someone else.  Burke has never categorically denied this.  I don't understand the danger in Burke popping up quickly here to either admit or deny the charge and then resuming his silence.  Why won't he?   You could do it for him.  Why won't you?  


This is public and level enough for the threshold issue. (jsrutstein - 12/8/2007 11:03:06 AM)
All Burke has to do to begin the moving-on process is post once right here in this thread.  George, admit or deny.  Otherwise, your lone ally here can do no more.


the parser needs a parson (jsrutstein - 12/8/2007 7:29:43 AM)
Burke said "I am reading many of [the comments attributed to me] for the first time. I wish I could write that well."

He didn't say I didn't write the comments.  He could argue that when writing the comments he wasn't technically "reading" them.  He could also argue that he can technically wish for something, like writing ability, that he already has.

In the face of the circumstantial evidence of the comments being his and the more direct evidence of his nasty behavior, I think it's fair to say that the burden of proving he didn't do it has shifted to him.

I think he got caught and made the wrong first decision to not admit guilt.  He probably knows at this point that even a categorical denial would not be believed, and he has no exonerating evidence.

The only satisfaction I derive from this is that he probably feels worse inside than any of those he's attacked.  It's going to take a very nice stranger or a good friend (if he has any) to get him to understand that the only way he can reconcile his conflicting desires to hide his shame and fulfill his political responsibilities is to take that first step and admit his guilt.



Man, I forgot Burke was Thomas Paine (Craig - 12/7/2007 9:46:46 PM)
I remember being especially annoyed at his "what-if" style of argument, basically arguing that just because Webb used to be a Republican he therefore could never be trusted again.  That kind of moronic logic was flawed, and anyway, it served no purpose after the primary.  I mean I recall meeting some who were somewhat skepitcal of Webb's return to the fold, but TPP refused to even give the guy a chance.  That seemed quite unfair to me.  And the constant comparisons of Lowell to communist leaders was just so over the top that it was almost funny.

I'll allow ther are somethings Ben and I don't agree on (I don't really understand his loathing of Dave Marsden, who's a pretty good guy from my own experience), but on this point he is correct: Burke is a poor district chair and should be replaced.  What kind of district chair sows doubt about his own party's candidate after the primary?



When I talked to George Friday, He offered to meet and address (Used2Bneutral - 12/8/2007 8:11:59 AM)
As I told Lowell yesterday, George offered to have him on his TV show THIS weekend for the hour long LIVE show to address the issues, apologies, or even the hard evidence that Ben seems to think doen't exist. Having seen both sides of these arguments and I have been trying to keep my head down to not get caught in the cross fire, I am severly pained by seeing such enourmously valuable and talented people, both of whom I consider close friends beating each other up rather than working that same energy at the opposition. Lowell I think thought that George was taking this lightly, I can absolutely say that is not the case. There should be no fear doing this in a neutral public forum as we have available on the TV show where the crew and production people are almost all Democrats from all over Northern Virginia and where the comments and actions will be completely candid and Almost not restricted (even the 1st amendment has some limits during prime-time). Plus for those that can't watch live but still want to listen it will be web-cast AND as always we will put it up unchanged on the Google Video site as we do with all our shows so others can make their own decisions.

The bottom line, lets get this over with.... every time I have thought progress has been made and the wound has started to heal on either side, someone internal or external to the discussions has re-opened the wound and each time it gets a little more ugly with a little more scar tissue..



first things first (jsrutstein - 12/8/2007 8:30:39 AM)
I've been reading a fair amount of the comments here and elsewhere on this controversy for a long time.  What is this "hard evidence" to counter the evidence that Burke was posing as someone other than Burke?  As I stated in my comment earlier this morning up the thread, I haven't even seen a categorical denial from Burke.  I suggest that even if Burke can't get a guest from the other side on his show, he ought to use his forum to have a lie detector administered to him.  I'd watch.


What a Clown. (spotter - 12/8/2007 10:11:57 AM)
Regardless of the intricacies of the who-did-what-to-whom part of this, one basic problem with Thomas Paine's comments really strikes me.  Republicans were in the majority (note use of past tense), fortunately for a relatively short period of time.  Democrats wanted to change that.  It would seem that the best way to change that would be to persuade some former Republicans and independents to become Democrats.

If you instead issue a fatwah against any former Republicans like Webb, and insist on strict adherence to rigid ideological requirements, aren't you just shrinking the pool of potential Democrats, and turning away many possible converts?

Webb won the primary.  As an avowed patriot, Thomas Paine should have accepted that.  Webb won the election.  The people have spoken.  They voted for change, both within the Democratic party and among the general public.  The majority of people voted Democratic.  That's a good thing.  That's majority rule. That's democracy.  Anyone who does not accept that fundamental concept does not belong in a party leadership position.



Good luck Lowell (Dianne - 12/8/2007 11:51:47 AM)
My local committee's Vice Chair (who runs the committee) refused to let the committee members support the 2005 Democratic candidate for the 88th District.  The Vice Chair stated (in his authority) that I was on my own in heping that candidate with his campaign.  If that isn't enough to throw someone out of the Party, then I don't know what is .... and yet the DPVA ignored my formal complaint!

Good luck Lowell, because I think that's all you'll have ..... just luck!  



George Burke (Mary I - 12/8/2007 11:57:06 AM)
Actually Joel....George may have more than one. Some are wondering if the 'game plan" is to deep six George and bring in Larry.....Don't know the answer to that thought.
What I do know and won't forget, is that George Burke did all that he could do to help Andy Hurst. As I remember, he also attempted to carry Janet in her debate with Ken.
Did he "like" Jim Webb? Certainly doesn't sound like it. Was he alone in that thought? Don't think so. The fact is Jim Webb is not everybody's cup of tea and hasn't been since his days at the USNA.  More than a few of his classmates were delighted when North won that boxing match and no, I didn't read about that in the "Nightengale Song"
I know a few of his classmates.
All that is in the past. Jim Webb won and he is doing a great job. Though my efforts were mainly on Andy's behalf,  I supported Webb from day one. His staff seems to know who supported the big guy as I got a Christmas card in the mail the other day.  Nice touch.
Again, one has to wonder what really is going on..


quite contrary (jsrutstein - 12/8/2007 12:19:30 PM)
Mary, thanks for the insidery info.

I don't know any of Webb's classmates, but I highly recommend The Nightingale's Song as a tremendous read.  I also agree that Webb has been a good Senator, and clearly better than Allen would have been.  I also doubt Miller would have beaten Allen; it was so fluky that Allen macaca'ed all over himself; against Miller, he might not have felt threatened enough to campaign where and when he did at the time of his macaca'ing to those "real" Virginians.  Finally, on Webb, I'll be forever grateful for his victory over Allen, which must be primarily credited to Webb himself, because, if Allen had won, he might be the leading GOP Presidential candidate.  Yikes!

On your "game plan," because I don't know if it's true or truthy, I'm loathe to speculate, especially because I agree with Lowell's repeated admonitions to not distract from the point of this post and thread.  I will say that it would seem a little too like the Davises to have spouses be officially reigning at the same time, although I could be persuaded that there's nothing untoward about a party official serving while his spouse is an active candidate.  Without displaying any more of my ignorance, I encourage moving this discussion over to my new post entitled "The Burke Connection - to Connolly?" which coincidentally speculates on the broader implications of this current push against Burke.



Great letter, one question. (JPTERP - 12/8/2007 3:30:02 PM)
In reference to point #4, is there some rule governing the voting age of 11th District members?  Even though Kenton is more politically informed than probably the majority of eligible voters, I can see reasonable grounds for establishing a standard that only eligible voters can vote.  The 18 year old standard is consistent with federal and state rules, so the party rule in itself doesn't strike me as entirely arbitrary.

Even putting this one issue aside, I think it stands that we should expect higher standards of conduct from a local party official.  The comments made by Burke here at RK and over at NLS raise pretty serious questions about Burke's personal conduct.  As a representative it seems reasonable to establish standards of conduct for a party official that are higher than those of a regular party member (e.g. that the official does not engage habitually in vicious ad hominem attacks against party members and party nominees).  Burke definitely needs to go.



Too bad there are only two parties in the country (Rebecca - 12/8/2007 4:08:05 PM)
In many democracies there are several parties and they govern through compromise. Too bad our country is set up to have only two. What that does is exclude a lot of opinions and it ultimately homogenizes the debate. When there is a real debate we see the Dems ripped apart because for many of us it is the only game in town. I'm not sure that's healthly for democracy, having only one choice outside of being a Republican.

I hope one day people will start discussing this problem seriously. I know some would say there is the Green Party and the Libertarians, etc. That's true, but the system is set up so they never have a chance. In other words, among most Americans they are not considered legitimate choices.

Witness the presidential debates. The mainstream media are showing the Dems and the Repubs. That's it.  



I don't have a problem with two parties (Craig - 12/9/2007 12:28:25 AM)
And who is to say that in thos eother democracies, there aren't manipulative boss-like party figures, as with ours?  This idea that multiplying the number of parties would somehow do anything helpful doesn't seem to me to be based on anything more than wishful thinking, and anyway,. if other parties wielded actual power, they'd likely also begin to attract a few unsavory elements.

Besides, I don't have a problem with the Democrats in general.  Just with one or two of them here and there.



Oh, puleez! (KathyinBlacksburg - 12/9/2007 2:17:00 PM)
If the whole spectrum of natural Dems continues to be divided (as in fragmenting the range from the DLC Dems to the Greens), we are cooked mathematically.  The splintering off of greens has really cost Dems.  And the last thing we need is yet another splintering.  The system is rigged against third or fourth parties.  Please do the math.  

Hoping and wishing for another system doesn't make it so.  We have to do the best with what we have.  



Three words. (Lowell - 12/9/2007 2:18:51 PM)
Instant. Runoff. Voting.


Interesting that you say that... (KathyinBlacksburg - 12/9/2007 3:31:47 PM)
The League of Women voters supports that concept, I believe. It is worth thinking about.  


To me, that's a fundamental Progressive (Lowell - 12/9/2007 3:33:14 PM)
reform.  Same thing with NON-partisan redistricting.


I Believe In Problem Solving & Solutions....However (Lee Diamond - 12/8/2007 4:33:20 PM)
I have to back up Lowell on this situation.  I think that I already did that substantively with my previous posts, but Lowell has been subjected to extremely poisonous personal attacks.

I think most of us recognize that the problems go a lot deeper than one person.  I don't know how much power DPVA has to step in, but there are times when state and national offices of organizations step into situations that a local cannot handle.

Our ability to win VA for the Democratic nominee in 2008 is endangered by this situation.  For that reason, I am not going to attack Mr. Burke.



Thanks Lee (Lowell - 12/8/2007 6:45:05 PM)
n/t


I agree (Rebecca - 12/8/2007 9:54:48 PM)
Thanks Lee. I agree. I don't always agree with Lowell or others, but name calling and personal attacks are inappropriate. Let's leave that to the Republicans. They are noted for eating their own.

Having said that I think we all need to be more tolerant of ideas with which we disagree, and I include in name calling the term "conspiracy nut" as well. Many things we used to think were unprovable conspiracies have turned out to be proven correct. The important thing is that we all try to preserve our democracy. The opposition loves nothing better than to see us consume our energy fighting with each other.



Test msg. from Tom. Comcast has shut down my Outlook Express acess. (Tom Counts - 12/9/2007 5:23:05 PM)
When problems occur they seem to come in batches.

Early this A.M. I was reading and replying to several e-mail messages via my Outlook Express mail client, in accordance with my agreement (contract) with Comcast when the automated Comcast spam blocker system suddenly decided that the (very few single addressee, not multiple) constituted spam messages from preventing me from using my Outlook Express.

I was able to send and receive messages using the Comcast Web mail feature, apparently because spam blocking software (at least as used by Comcast) so it's likely that this test will work. Comcast, having a total monopoly where I live (except for dial-up which they don't offer)gets me pissed off even more so than some of the TP (Toilet Paper ?)/TPP (Patriotic "TP" ?).

Sorry about the too-lengthy off-topic test, and especially the poor attempt at humor re TP/TPP. And apoligies to TP, TPP, and of course George if he really is not Thomas Paine/Thomas Paine Patriot as he (graciously) assured me at Gerry's Thank You brunch yesterday that he is NOT.



What, did someone hijack his IP address? (Lowell - 12/9/2007 8:24:24 PM)
Eric addressed this from a technical perspective; in short, there's a 99% chance (probably higher) that TPP was George Burke.  This is getting utterly ridiculous.


COMMENT HIDDEN (VAsCheGuevara - 12/9/2007 11:07:29 PM)


Last time I checked, I support LESLIE (Lowell - 12/9/2007 11:26:24 PM)
Byrne, not LARRY Byrne.